2008 Woodie Awards
Do values voters value voters?
Jonathan Coley
Issue date: 10/31/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 2 next >
The religious right has gone mad. Those who have paid any attention to the upcoming presidential election at all have probably heard the evangelical groupthink about candidates like Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson: too liberal, too independent, too indecisive or too late.
Social conservative big names like James Dobson have also threatened to split from the Republicans and form their own third-party if someone like Guiliani is nominated for president, which would almost certainly propel a Democrat like Hillary Clinton to victory.
Since Dobson and others have stated before that they would never support a pro-choice candidate in an election, their threats are largely predictable.
But I didn't see this one coming.
Mike Huckabee, the former Republican governor of Arkansas, has run one of the most remarkable campaigns of the election.
Coming off smooth debate performances and big wins at straw polls, he now finds himself at 18 percent in Iowa, which is the first state to vote, and at 12 percent nationally (just 9 percent behind the frontrunner, Giuliani), according to the respecting polling organization Rasmussen Reports.
After a previous quarter of low fundraising, he now finds his campaign surging in contributions.
And his success in the heavily Democratic state of Arkansas, as well as his socially conservative positions on abortion and gay marriage, make him seem like a godsend to conservatives.
Yet, in an editorial in last Friday's Wall Street Journal, social conservatives trotted out their big guns in opposition to their newfound wonder child, leaving most political aficionados scratching their heads.
Phyllis Schlafly, often called the "first lady" of conservatives, accused the former governor of destroying the conservative movement in Arkansas. And the editorial's writer, John Fund, accused Huckabee of "running hard right on social issues but liberal-populist on some economic issues."
Social conservative big names like James Dobson have also threatened to split from the Republicans and form their own third-party if someone like Guiliani is nominated for president, which would almost certainly propel a Democrat like Hillary Clinton to victory.
Since Dobson and others have stated before that they would never support a pro-choice candidate in an election, their threats are largely predictable.
But I didn't see this one coming.
Mike Huckabee, the former Republican governor of Arkansas, has run one of the most remarkable campaigns of the election.
Coming off smooth debate performances and big wins at straw polls, he now finds himself at 18 percent in Iowa, which is the first state to vote, and at 12 percent nationally (just 9 percent behind the frontrunner, Giuliani), according to the respecting polling organization Rasmussen Reports.
After a previous quarter of low fundraising, he now finds his campaign surging in contributions.
And his success in the heavily Democratic state of Arkansas, as well as his socially conservative positions on abortion and gay marriage, make him seem like a godsend to conservatives.
Yet, in an editorial in last Friday's Wall Street Journal, social conservatives trotted out their big guns in opposition to their newfound wonder child, leaving most political aficionados scratching their heads.
Phyllis Schlafly, often called the "first lady" of conservatives, accused the former governor of destroying the conservative movement in Arkansas. And the editorial's writer, John Fund, accused Huckabee of "running hard right on social issues but liberal-populist on some economic issues."